“Any holders of Parthenon Sculptures outside Greece to return them forthwith to Athens, where they can be reunited with their brothers and sisters”, the distinguished historian of the University of Cambridge, Dr. Paul Cartledge, stated in Kathimerini. Vice-Chairman of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles and a 50-year scholar of ancient Greek history, he congratulates the tireless struggle of the Greeks for the return of their stolen antiquities, while stressing the favourable climate in the UK for the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles.

“YouGov polls regularly register above 60 percent support for reunification” argues Professor Cartledge, explaining that “The UK’s main journal of record, The Times, has recently flipped its longstanding editorial policy – from a retentionist to a reunificatory stance”.

Regarding the problems of the sculptures' storage at the British Museum, Cartledge, critical of the British Museum, also stresses their poor conservation, focusing among other things on the issue of dampness in Room 18, as well as the series of thefts by the former curator of the Greek and Roman wings. According to Dr. Cartledge, «The Museum’s repeated claim to have been an exemplary caretaker of ‘its’ Marbles since 1817 has also been exploded on two academic fronts: a) by the late William St Clair, exposing the hushed-up, irreparable damage (‘skinning’) inflicted on frieze sculptures on Lord Duveen’s orders in the late 1930s; and lately b) by international human rights lawyer Professor Catharine Titi exposing the fragility of the UK’s original claim to legality of purchase in 1816”.

The timeline of the sale of the sculptures is set four years after the removal of the sculptures from the Acropolis, but personal debts lead Lord Elgin to submit a proposal to the British Museum to sell the stolen sculptures, estimating their value at £35,000, with the British Parliament accepting Elgin's offer. From then on, the sculptures began to be exhibited at the British Museum with the newly-established Greek state making the first request for their return in 1835.

But did Lord Elgin have the right to sell the sculptures? According to Dr. Cartledge, who relies on the legal assumptions presented in the book, “The Parthenon Marbles and International Law”, “the UK does have legal title to ‘ownership’ of the British Museum holdings, but only with regards to domestic law. Contrariwise it is evidenced that Lord Elgin’s title to what he sold to the U.K. for £35,000 in 1816 was anything but Acropolis rock-solid. So far, despite rigorous searches in Ottoman archives, the best that ‘retentionist’ defenders of the UK and the BM can dredge up is an Italian translation of a permit issued by an Ottoman high-up, not formally carrying the imprimatur of the Sultan himself, allowing Elgin’s men to pick up marbles lying around on the ground and copy stones bearing figures – no mention of hacking worked marbles off the extant Temple itself and having them shipped at great risk of further damage to the UK”.

“Conclusively, one of the issues at the heart of that ancient-history debate is the existence or nonexistence of any sort of official Ottoman firman authorizing Elgin and his cohorts to damage the Acropolis. On the other hand,”, Professor Cartledge adds, “the reunification requires at least one, possibly two Acts of Parliament to be either amended or rescinded: a) of “1816” about the purchasing of and the claim to ownership of the Elgin Collection including the Parthenon Sculptures and, b) of “1963”, “Museums Act”. That requires parliamentary time and support. The present (Tory) UK government is dead against even talking about any legislative change, for example, witness the UK PM’s recent extreme discourtesy to the Greek PM. The Chair of the British Museum Trustees is, therefore, unable to help the Greek government directly, even if he wanted to; his talk about a ‘deal’ is just that – “hot air”.

After two centuries of claims by the Greek State, the provocative fashion show in the Duveen Hall, in front of the Greek antiquities, provoked the anger of the Greek Ministry of Culture, with the Minister of Culture Lina Mendonispeaking of "zero respect", while the British media reiterated the conflict between the two governments and the Greek demand for the return of the sculptures.

As vice-chairman of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, Professor Cartledge argues for the reunification of the sculptures on Greek soil, stressing, “Outside Athens and Greece any Parthenon Marbles held abroad risk looking like imperial loot without much if any current cultural-political significance”. At the same time, he underlines, “The Parthenon was a temple of as well as on the Acropolis, so any sculptures therefrom that survive but cannot be re-placed on what remains of the temple itself should be reunited in the dedicated Acropolis Museum”.

Highlighting the historical and cultural value of the Parthenon, the distinguished academic elaborates on the argument of return by explaining that, “due to a series of historic conjunctions, like the liberation of the new state of Greece from the Ottoman empire, end of the Ottoman empire, growth of representative democracy, the increased importance of the Parthenon as a symbol of the world’s first democracy or ‘people-power’, division of Europe – and the world -  between democracies and autocracies, Parthenon stands as a symbol of both cultural excellence and political freedoms, and even more importantly so. Therefore”, he adds, “any holders of Parthenon Marbles/Sculptures outside Greece to return them forthwith to Athens, where they can be reunited with their brothers and sisters in a fully appropriate space”.

In summary, the Emeritus Professor of Cambridge argues that the return of the Parthenon Marbles to Greece will influence the global debate on the return of stolen antiquities to their place of origin, pointing out that, “The Parthenon Marbles is, in fact, a unique case, without implications for the fate of any other ‘restitution’ case, but, even so, reunifying the Parthenon Marbles back in Athens would have a mega impact on other legitimate claims for repatriation currently being lodged against the British Museum, above all perhaps that for the Benin Bronzes”.

This article was first published in ekathimeriniand writte by Athanasios Katsikidis.

To read the article in Greek, follow the link here.

12 March 2021

Yannis Andritsopoulos, London Correspondent for the Greek daily newspaper Ta Neain an exclusive interview asked UK Prime Minister Johnson about the Parthenon Marbles.

Prime Minister Johnson was asked specificlly about Prime Minister Mitsotakis' plea to have the Parthenon Marbles back in Greece.

Sadly PM Johnson chose to answer the question by repeating that the UK governments standpoint is based on legal ownership. Yet the question remains, if the legality was uncontestable, why did the UK government not retain ownership and instead transfered it to the British Museum?

In today's exclusive interview with the Greek daily newspaper Ta Nea, when asked about the Parthenon Marbles, British PM Johnson said: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed Prime Minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.But the UK Government has a firm longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s Trustees since their acquisition.” 

In this wide-ranging interview, Prime Minister Johnson also covered topics from post-Brexit Britain to ‘Global Britain’ serving UK citizens and defending UK values by extending the UK’s international influence.

He also said the UK: "remains committed to working alongside our partners in the region and the UN to find a just and sustainable solution to the Cyprus problem.” Adding that Britain is following developments in the region closely and "welcomes the resumption of Greece-Turkey talks" urging all all parties to prioritise dialogue and diplomacy.

"I am of course a keen scholar of Greek history, the decisive impact of Navarino on the success of the Greek War of Independence and Britain’s crucial role in it. The Ancient Greeks founded western civilisation and gave us science, culture, philosophy, comedy, tragedy, poetry, mathematics, literature, democracy – to name just a few. But modern Greece’s emergence on the international scene as an independent nation state has also had enormous significance for the world. Greece plays an important role in Europe, NATO and in a pivotal region connecting Europe to the Middle East.

Despite some of the challenges the country has faced over the past two hundred years, Greece today is a well-governed, prosperous, creative, peace-loving international partner in the family of nations and makes a crucial contribution to the world stage." Concluded Prime Minister Johnson.

And BCRPM would add: the halves from the Parthenon currently displayed the wrong way round in the British Museum's Room 18, were removed when Greece had no voice. As an independent nation, Greece has been asking politely for some time for the UK to find a way to reunite the sculptures in Athens, so that the surviving pieces may be viewed as close as possible to the Parthenon. The BCRPM sincerely hopes that the UK can begin talks to find a solution to this unecessary division of this peerless collection of sculptures from the Parthenon.   

The interview by Yannis Andritsopoulos was published in the Greek daily newspaper Ta Nea (www.tanea.gr), today 12 March 2021. To read the interview in English, visit the linkhere. 

If only..... 

Page 76 of Private Eye Annual 2021, available from booksellers including Waterstones.

Professor Armand D'Angour, is Professor of Classics at Jesus College Oxford, and as the newest member of BCRPM, outlines his thoughts on the continued plight of the Parthenon Marbles: 

When I was at school studying Classics in the 1970s, the general view in the UK was that the Elgin Marbles had been legally acquired from the Greeks (via the Turks), that they were the essential centrepiece of the British Museum collection, that they had been nobly rescued from destruction by Elgin, that they were far safer in the clean air of London than in traffic-plagued Athens, and that returning them would set a terrible precedent that could lead to the world's museums being denuded.

Now, as a Classics Professor, I know that none of those arguments hold true. First, the acquisition by Elgin was for his personal profit and aggrandisement, and was dubiously legal - his alleged firman seems not even to exist; and it was completed through agreement with Turkish rulers of Greece and not Greeks themselves. Secondly, the display of the marbles in the Duveen Gallery is far from ideal; a colourful and well lit set of replicas would be much more appealing - not to mention the wonderful objects Greece might offer on loan in return, or a display of some of the BM's many other millions of objects currently in storage. Thirdly, the Marbles were not kept safe, but damaged with inappropriate cleaning fluids; the beautiful new museum on the Acropolis is a much worthier site today, and traffic is far worse in London than it is in Athens! Few objects have such iconic national status - and if they do, there would be a strong case for their return too to their place of origin.

These are arguments from common sense and history. The main arguments, though, that have persuaded me personally that the time has come for the reunification of the marbles in Athens are moral and emotional. It feels to many, Greeks and non-Greeks as if they are a vital part of the Greek land and soul; and that their theft by Elgin, compounded by a high-handed attitude to their return, remains an open wound.

The tale is told that when the Greeks were fighting for their independence, a group of soldiers observed the Turks stripping lead from between the stones of the Parthenon for use as bullets. Relatively uneducated and rustic Christians as the soldiers were, they felt strongly that this was a dreadful desecration of this pagan monument that had eternal significance to Greeks. They sent a delegation to the Turkish commander with a box of bullets - the very means of their own possible deaths - telling him that they would prefer them to be used than for the great ancient monument to be fatally damaged. Unhistorical as this anecdote undoubtedly is, the fact that it has often been told by Greeks is indicative of their strong feelings about this unique monument.

The emotional resonance of the Parthenon to Greeks - something increasingly recognised and appreciated by British people - makes for me one of the strongest cases for the reunification of the Marbles.

British Museum, Room 18, The Parthenon Galleries, at 16:07,  after the voices of the women of Troy had concluded their stories, readings from a novel 'A thousand Ships' by Natalie Haynes,part of Project Season Women, directed by Magdalena Zira and Athina Kasiou, Professor Edith Hall unfurled a flag with a heartfelt request: Reunite the Parthenon Marbles.

A team of twenty actresses from Cyprus and the UK performed readings in both English and in Greek over a period of five hours in three different locations of the British Museum.

Professor Edith Hall described the day of readings as a "grand epic gesture.... reclaiming the stories of the Trojan War" and after the readings, Edith with the help of two students, unfurled a flag with the image of the Parthenon Gallery on the top floor of the Acropolis Museum and the words: Reunite the Parthenon Marbles. To reunite the surviving sculptures from the British Museum with those in the Acropolis Museum, would be a grand epic gesture, especially as this request has been voiced by Greece since 1843. 

This year is also Melina Mercouri's year and just two Saturdays prior, during the 'BP or not BP?' protest, again in Room 18, three presentations were made to state the case for the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles.

On this Saturday, after the staged readings from Natalie Haynes novel 'A Thousand Ships' in the context of Creative Responses to Troy, accmpanying the current exhibition Troy:myth and reality, Edith Hall added the following statement as Kitty Cooke and Lucy Bilson held up the flag:

"I have been involved in this amazing production of 'A Thousand Ships' as mentor and friend of Natalie Haynes and PhD supervisor to two of the directors, Magdalena Zira and Helen Eastman. But what I am going to say is entirely as an individual, a Professor of Classics at London University and most of all as a proud member of the BCRPM. This intervention has nothing to do with the theatre companies and actors involved today. Listening to these beautiful stories, born in the poetry of Homer in ancient Greece, I cannot pass up the opportunity to argue that these equally beautiful sculptures from ancient Greece, crow-barred and stolen from their homeland two hundred years ago, deserve to be reunited in their homeland with the total work of art that is the Athenian Parthenon. Thanks to my brave allies Kitty Cooke and Lucy Bilson, brave undergraduates studying Classics at University College London."

Photos courtesy of Sarah Pynder.

The 14 texts which follow, each reflecting the writer’s viewpoint, are so rich and comprehensive that it is impossible for an introduction to fully encompass their essence. In most cases, the beginning, middle and end of the text refers to the barbaric act committed by Elgin.

I have therefore chosen not to repeat those well-known, well-rehearsed and well-discussed issues. Instead, I chose to contribute certain new arguments to the cause of returning and reunifying the marbles or sculptures of the Parthenon in the Acropolis Museum, which is their newly designated place of protection and display, a place that stands in close dialogue with the very monument from which those severed members originally came.

As a rich body of international bibliography on the subject makes clear, it is now obvious to all that the so-called firman which Thomas Bruce, the Earl of Elgin and ambassador to the Ottoman Empire from 1799-1803, is supposed to have procured from the Supreme Porte, in other words from Sultan Selim III, does not exist. If such a document had existed, it would have been submitted to the examining committee of the British House of Commons in 1816 – and the whole question of legality, and restitution claims by the Greek state, would have taken a different turn.

According to Elgin’s testimony to the committee, the original document sent by the Turkish authorities to Athens was lost. The Reverend Philip Hunt, the ambassador’s assistant, offered in testimony what he could recollect, 14 years later, of a translation of a French version of the original firman into Italian and later rendered into English.

However:

ONE

Official firmans of the sultan were always made in two copies, of which one was kept in the official archives and the other was sent to the designated recipient. In the course ofall the investigations made hitherto, the original, archived version of the firman has never been found.

TWO
Genuine firmans were despatched through a special designated messenger or an authorized individual or delivered by captains of the Turkish navy. In this case the so-called firman was brought to Athens by Philip Hunt, Elgin’s assistant.

THREE
For the actions that Elgin was seeking to undertake on the Acropolis, formal permission was indeed necessary because according to an unwritten Ottoman law, marble in all its forms – works of art, ancient or otherwise, and the raw material itself – belonged to the sultan. All the more so if marbles were to be removed from such a well preserved surviving decoration of a monument that was well respected by Ottoman officials as a “temple of the idols” – namely the Parthenon.

Thanks to the authentic firmans that were issued over the years for various purposes, we can ascertain what a genuine sultan’s firman looked like, what formalities it observed, what turns of phrase and calligraphy were used, and all its other features. I will not enumerate the hundreds of examples that might be mentioned. I will focus instead on two sultan’s firmans which are of immediate relevance, because they concern two protagonists of our story – Lord Elgin and Lord Byron. They are also, of course, close chronologically. The first is dated 1802 and was brought to light by Dyfri Williams. It is the official passport-firman granted to Elgin which authorized his trip to Athens and the Aegean archipelago. The second was granted to Byron in 1810 and is presented here for the first time, thanks to the generosity of a particular individual. It is the official travel document which was issued to Byron: its interpretation and presentation are the work of Ilias Kolovos, a scholar of Ottoman history.

When one compares these two original passport-firmans, they turn out to be very much alike in format, despite the fact that Sultan Selim III died in 1808 and was replaced on the throne by Mustafa IV. If we then compare those two documents – the one issued to Elgin and the one granted to Byron, which is available to us in Turkish (in Roman script) as well as English translation – with the so-called firman granted to Elgin which supposedly allowed him to remove sculptures from the Parthenon – at least according to the Italian translation, and its later English rendering. It becomes clear – as was demonstrated by the Ottomanist scholar Vasilis Dimitriadis at a conference on the Parthenon and its sculptures – that Elgin’s so-called permit is anything but a genuine sultan’s firman. He would have needed to get the personal authorization of the sultan, instead of merely relying – as he did - on the deputy to the Grand Vizier, Sejid Abdullah. That deputy was standing in because the actual Grand Vizier – Kor Yusuf Ziyauddin Pasha, otherwise known as Djezzar, (the butcher) – was at the time in Egypt.

Given that the so-called permit for the removal of the sculptures was not a genuine sultan’s act, but merely a decision issued by the deputy to the Grand Vizier – assuming that the Italian translation is real and accurate –how can anyone justify the still-adamant denial by the British authorities and the British Museum that what took place was an act of vandalism – indeed, a plundering of sculptures that were integral to the monument, constituent parts of the Parthenon? Or justify their refusal to return and reunify the marbles in the Acropolis Museum?

To put it more bluntly, how is it that certain officials – in the British Museum and elsewhere in Britain – still regard as acceptable a flawed purchase in 1816, and an arbitrary decision by Parliament in 1963, insofar as these relate to the ongoing captivity of the Parthenon marbles?

This is not the place to delve deep into the reasons for that insistence. Let me focus instead on some initiatives aimed at resolving the issue, in accordance with the realities of the 21st century. In addition to the strong and respectable arguments laid out by many people over two centuries – especially by Melina Mercouri in 1982-83 – all the way up to 2021, a number of developments stand out.

ONE
In September 2021, UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property (ICPRCP) adopted a decision which clearly recognizes Greece’s aspirations as rational, justified and ethical. It also affirmed the intergovernmental nature of the dispute and called for consultations between Britain and Greece.

TWO
A particular methodology was followed in the return and reintegration of the so-called Fagan fragment from Palermo. This was the first return which was treated as a matter from State to State. Initially, in January 2022, the return was presented as an unspecified “deposit” – and then, in June 2022, came the permanent reintegration of the fragment into the Parthenon frieze: an act that was underpinned not merely by legal norms and technicalities but also by the friendship between two nations - Greece on one hand, Italy and in particular Sicily on the other – who share common values.

THREE
In March 2023, Pope Francis returned three fragments of the Parthenon, as an expression of universal truth, for the definitive reunification of the monument’s scattered sculptures.
The British government and the British Museum would do well to ponder the significance all these developments, while also considering certain other factors such as:

ONE
The consistent majority of British public opinion [in favour of return]

TWO
The continued support expressed by the near-entirety of the British press

THREE
International public opinion, which favours the reunification of this world-renowned monument…so that it can be properly presented in all its integrity as a work of supreme architectural and sculptural beauty; and experienced as a symbol of democracy by people of allgenerations and national origins.

And in case those arguments fail to persuade doubters of the moral soundness of Greece’s case, I will add yet another one.

Over the past few decades, there have been some well-known cases of restitution of art works – for example to Italy or to Africa. Such returns have even been made by Britain. Let me specify one example.

On August 1, 2008, the upper section of a funerary monument was returned to Greece from New York.

It was made of Pentelic marble and it dates from the late fifth century – about 410 BCE, shortly after the completion of the Parthenon. Μy Professor George Despinis, as early as 1993, had proven that the piece came from a funerary monument whose lower half had been discovered in the soil of Attica – in Porto Rafti – and was then conserved in the Museum of Βrauron in Attica.

After some negotiations, the purchasers of the upper part – who were American citizens –gave that segment back to Greece, while Greece acknowledged that the purchase had been made in good faith. The matter was settled and the two parts of the funerary monument are reunited in a Greek museum.

I will now refer to a rather similar case, concerning the Parthenon. The lower part of segment number XXVII of the Parthenon frieze – showing a charioteer, part of a chariot and a stable lad –is in the Parthenon Gallery, while the upper part is in the Duveen Gallery of the British Museum.

Just about anybody will readily understand the similarity of the two stories. In particular, the morally equivalent fate of the piece of marble that was broken off and plundered by Elgin’s team and the severed upper part of the funerary monument – while in both cases, the lower sections remained in the place where the works had been fashioned.

So given that the principle of repatriation was applied in the case of the artefact in New York, exactly the same norm should apply in the case of the broken segment from the northern side of the Parthenon frieze.

One could of course take the argument further and note that in the case of the funerary monument, the buyer was in legal terms an individual rather than a state; and then observe that under international law, no state can retroactively justify illegal acts by one of its citizens on foreign soil - given that in such cases international law supersedes anything enacted by local or national legislatures.

In view of all that, how can it be that a state, in this instance the British state, vindicates the vandalism and plunder perpetrated by one of its subjects? Considering that Elgin, as a private individual, committed an act of vandalism, along with his associates, and broke off sculptures from the Parthenon - only to transport them to England in order to decorate his home, where they would have stayed if he had not gone bankrupt.

People who persist in justifying the purchase of 1816 must surely accept this: the mostone might say is that this decision amounted to a “receipt of stolen goods” in good faith – as was the case with the purchase of upper part of the funerary monument from Brauron.

In no way can they justify the illegal actions of a British subject, Lord Elgin – in view of the considerations I have laid out.

Nor, by the same token, should any government οr state wish to carry the moral burden that results from such tainted acts. I believe the moment has come for our British friends to take a noble decision and rid themselves of the moral burden which Elgin - rashly, and in pursuit of personal gain – laid on Britain, the British Museum and the people of Britain.

The above text was the lead article in a Kathimerini supplement published 17 March 2024, entitled:H AΡΠΑΓΗ, 'Tthe Grab, Elgin and the Parthenon Sculptures'

In the same supplement BCRPM member Bruce Clark's article 'Laws, democracy and hypocrisy' was also plublished.

Photo credit for the images of Professor Stampolidis: Paris Tavitian 

Wednesday 06 March 2024 and our thoughts are with the Hellenic spirit that was Melina Mercouri.

Three decades since Melina passed away, at every protest, every campaign, every thought that is directed at the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, also embraces Melina's soulful and heartfelt pleas.

As Greece's Minister of Culture and Science, Melina Mercouri's commitment for the return of the sculptures removed from the Acropolis in the 19th century continue to inspire all that also feel strongly and view this long-standing request as a just cause.

“I hope to see the marbles return to Athens before I die. But if they return later, I will be reborn to see them.” Melina Mercouri said, a phrase repeated by other women whose lifetime dedication to this cause continues. 

The reunification of the Parthenon Marbles campaign began at the UNESCO General Policy Conference in Mexico (1982) when Mercouri, then Minister of Culture and Science for Greece, put forward Greece's request for the return of the sculptures. And it is at UNESCO's ICPRCP meetings that this request continues to dominate.

On 29 September 2021, UNESCO ICPRCP Intergovernmental Committee, for the first time in its history, adopted by consensus Decision 22 COM 6, which is specifically dedicated to the Parthenon Marbles issue. The added value of that Decision is that for the first time the committee: "Recognized expressly the legitimate and rightful demand of Greece. Recognized that the case has an intergovernmental character and, therefore, the obligation to return the Parthenon Sculptures lies squarely on the UK Government and expressed its disappointment that its respective previous Recommendations have not been observed by the UK."

There is global support for the reunification, especially post the opening of the superlative Acropolis Museum, and yet there is no British political will to amend the museum's law that could see these sculptures returning to Athens. Of the 50% of the original sculptures that survive, about half are in the British Museum and half in the Acropolis Museum. There are a few fragments in a few museums: the Louvre in Paris, the National Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen, the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, and the Martin von Wagner Museum in the University of Würzburg.

The good and great news is that some fragments have been returned and that the campaign continues. Despite the lack of political will in the UK, there is plenty of public support and in fairness, that has been there for many decades.

Greece has also made repeated offers to provide the British Museum with Greek artefacts not seen outside of Greece, should the surviving Parthenon Marbles be reunited in the Acropolis Museum.

There are ongoing talks between PM Mitsotakis and the British Museum.

We continue to hope.

22 September 2018

When the Parthenon in Athens fell into ruins in early the 1800s, a British ambassador with permission from the Ottoman Empire preserved about half the sculptures, which are now at the British Museum. But Greeks for centuries have wanted them back; the deal was made before their country fought for independence from the monarchy. NewsHour Weekend Special Correspondent Christopher Livesay reports.

Watch the PBS Newshour podcast here or listen to the audio here.

Read the Full Transcript

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

A highlight of London's British Museum is one of its earliest acquisitions, the Parthenon Marbles. These sculptures once decorated the great 5th century BCE temple on the Acropolis in Greece. Considered among the great achievements of the classical world, they depict mythical creatures, stories of the gods along with average people.

• HANNAH BOULTON:

They are very significant and important masterpieces, really, of the ancient Greek world.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

Hannah Boulton is the spokesperson for the British Museum. She admits that how these classical works came to be in England is a sensitive subject, one the museum takes some pains to explain.

• HANNAH BOULTON:

I think it, obviously, has always been a topic of debate ever since the objects came to London and into the British Museum. It's not a new debate.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

The story starts in the early 1800s. The Parthenon had fallen to ruin. Half the marbles were destroyed by neglect and war. Then, a British ambassador, Lord Elgin, made an agreement with Ottoman authorities who were in control of Athens at the time to remove some of statues and friezes. He took about half of the remaining sculptures.

• HANNAH BOULTON:

And then he shipped that back to the UK. For a long time it remained part of his personal collection so he put it on display and then he made the decision to sell the collection to the nation. And the Parliament chose to acquire it and then pass it on the British Museum. So we would certainly say that Lord Elgin had performed a great service in terms of rescuing some of these examples.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

But Greeks don't see it that way. For decades now, they have argued that the Ottomans were occupiers, so the deal with Elgin wasn't valid, and the marbles belong in Greece. Why does Greece want to have the Parthenon Marbles back in Athens?

• LYDIA KONIORDOU:

It's not just bringing them back to Athens or to Greece. That's where they were created. But this is not our claim. Our claim is to put back a unique piece of art. To put it back together. Bring it back together.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

Lydia Koniordou was Greece's Minister of Culture from 2016 to 2018. We met her at the Acropolis where the Parthenon temple stands overlooking Athens.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

So first it was Lord Elgin who removed 50 percent.

• LYDIA KONIORDOU:

Almost 50 percent.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

All of the marbles, she says, have now been removed from the monument for protection from the elements. Then it was Greece that consciously decided to remove the remaining.

• LYDIA KONIORDOU:

Yes, the scientists that were responsible decided to remove and take them to the Acropolis Museum. It was nine years ago when the Acropolis Museum was completed.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

In fact, the Acropolis Museum was built in part as a response to the British Museum's claim that Greece did not have a proper place to display the sculptures. The glass and steel structure has a dramatic view of the Acropolis, so while you're observing the art you can see the actual Parthenon. The third floor is set up just like the Parthenon, with the same proportions. These friezes, from the west side of the temple, are nearly all original. On the other three sides, there are some originals but also a lot of gaps, as well as white plaster copies of the friezes and statues now in Britain.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

We believe that one day we could replace the copies with the orginals to show all this unique art in its grandeur. Every block has two or three figures and here is only one.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

Dimitrios Pandermalis is the Director of the Acropolis Museum where the story of the missing marbles differs widely from that of the British Museum. Presentations for visitors portray Lord Elgin critically. One film shows the marbles flying off the Parthenon and calls it the uncontrollable plundering of the Acropolis. You have these videos that actually show how the pieces were removed. Another film depicts how one of the marbles was crudely split by Elgin's workmen.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

He damaged the art pieces, yes.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

He did damage some of these pieces.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

Of course, it was to be expected.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

The British Museum disputes the claim Elgin damaged the sculptures. It also sees it as a plus that half the collection is in Britain and half in Greece.

• HANNAH BOULTON:

I think the situation we find ourselves in now we feel is quite beneficial. It ensures that examples of the wonderful sculptures from the Parthenon can be seen by a world audience here at the British Museum and in a world context in terms of being able to compare with Egypt and Rome and so on and so forth. But we feel the two narratives we are able to tell with the objects being in two different places is beneficial to everybody.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

But Pandermalis says rather than being in two places the sculptures should be reunified, literally. He showed us examples around the museum, including one that is almost complete save for one thing.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

So this sculpture is original except the right foot.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

And this. The chest of the god Poseidon. So the marble portion in the center where we can see clearly defined the abdomen, that's original but the surrounding portion in plaster, the shoulders, that's in London. So the piece has been completely split in half.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

Yes.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

And perhaps most dramatic, this frieze. So the darker stone is the original and the white plaster that represents what's in the British Museum.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

Yes. Exactly.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

And here it is in the British Museum. The missing marble head and chest floating in a display space.

• LYDIA KONIORDOU:

It just doesn't make sense. It's like cutting, for instance, the Last Supper of Da Vinci and taking one apostle to one museum and another apostle to another museum. We feel also it's a symbolic act today to bring back this emblem of our world. To put it back together.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

If you bring back this emblem, aren't there untold other emblems that need to be brought back. Is this a slippery slope?

• LYDIA KONIORDOU:

We do not claim, as Greek state, we do not claim other treasures. We feel that this is unique. This claim will never be abandoned by this country because we feel this is our duty.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

As for visitors to the Acropolis museum. How do you feel about the fact that half the collection is in the British Museum?

• MAN:

Not good.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

The Roscoe family is from Ohio. What do you guys think?

• JIM ROSCOE:

I think it would be nice to have them in one spot where they originated.

• EMMA ROSCOE:

You're coming here to see the history of it so it would be nice to see the complete history rather than replicas.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

You've seen them in the British Museum. So what do you think about the fact that the collection is kind of split.

• TIM:

It's sad. When you see this. I think this museum is a phenomenal place to display them. It's beautiful and they way it's been built almost waiting to have them back. It's interesting.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

As recently as May the Greek President, Prokopios Pavlopoulos, told Prince Charles that he hoped the Marbles would be returned. And the British opposition Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn has said he too is in favor of returning the Marbles to Greece. But the British Museum's position is the marbles in its collection are legally theirs. They would, however, consider a loan. After all, the British Museum regularly loans pieces from its collection to other museums around the world.

• HANNAH BOULTON:

I think we would certainly see there being a great benefit in extending that lending and trying to find ways to collaborate with colleagues, not just in Greece but elsewhere in the world to share the Parthenon sculptures that we have in our collection.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

But sharing the sculptures is not what the ancient Greeks who created them would have wanted claims Pandermalis.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

They would be very angry.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

The ancient Greeks would be very angry?

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

Yes

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

Why?

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

Because they were crazy for perfection. It was a perfection but today it is not.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

As for whether he will ever see all the remaining Parthenon Marbles together under this roof.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

I'm sure.

• CHRISTOPHER LIVESAY:

You' re sure that you will see them.

• DIMITRIOS PANDERMALIS:

But I don't know when.

The French artist, Auguste Rodin drew inspiration from the headless ancient sculptures. The Parthenon Marbles were his favourite works of art during his 15 visits to the British Museum from 1881 to 1917. Yet this is no argument for the British Museum's director Hartwig Fischer to justify retaining the sculptures from the Parthenon in the British Museum.

The new exhibition Rodin and the Art of Ancient Greece (26 April – 29 July 2018) at the British Museum may place the sculptures 'in the context of world cultures' but does not justify the BM's refusal to allow Athens to display the surviving pieces as united as possible, and with views to the Parthenon itself.

'Although the marble stonework of the Parthenon had proven its durability against the ravages of time, it was not indestructible. In 1687, Venetian forces laying siege to Athens shelled the ancient city, igniting a powder magazine stored inside the Parthenon. The resulting explosion was catastrophic, obliterating the cella and the elaborate frieze that had adorned its exterior. Attempts by the Venetians to remove statues from the pediments were similarly disastrous, as multiple sculptures fell to the ground and were shattered beyond repair. Most of the remaining statues and reliefs (known as the "Elgin" or "Parthenon Marbles") were later spirited away in the early 19th Century by Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire. Controversially, these pieces are displayed in the British Museum to this day. Meanwhile, the Parthenon itself has since undergone rigorous restoration and preservation work, with much of the damaged peristyle reassembled to give modern visitors a glimpse of the temple's ancient splendour atop the hill where it has stood for over two thousand years.' 

If understanding world culture also means understanding history's mistakes, then (where possible) putting right old wrongs can promote cultural and international relations. Reuniting the Parthenon Marbles in Athens ought to be a possibility that supports world cultures for all the right reasons and promotes greater understanding, respect and compassion.

We are certain that Rodin's exhibition at the British Museum will be exquisite and enjoyed by many, however it can never replace the sheer inspiration that would be enjoyed, by many more, if we could hope to see the surviving sculptures reunited in the superlative Acropolis Museum.

Hartwig Fischer, director of the British Museum, is also quoted as saying that although other artists had been inspired by the Parthenon sculptures, Rodin had responded "with a passion that was to last a lifetime". The passion and love for the Parthenon Marbles felt by millions of Acropolis Museum visitors will continue forever. A Rodin's exhibition at the British Museum would be equally possible with a loan from Athens to London too.

Whilst the BM might be trying to recontextualize the sculptures from the Parthenon, a building which still stands - it will never erode the natural thirst of millions of visitors to the Acropolis Museum, hoping to see the unity of this peerless work of art.

Letter from the Greek Ambassador, H E Dimitris Caramitsos-TzirasDimitris Caramitsos-Tziras to Hartwig Fischer, Director of the British Museum, 25 April  2018. 

More articles on this include:

British Museum claims French artist Rodin proves why Parthenon Marbles should stay in Britain

Rodin's work to go on show in London next to Parthenon marbles

Rodin's love of the Parthenon sculptures revealed

Article in the Evening Standard and letter from Chair of the BCRPM to the Evening Standard

Letters Page Evening Standard:

Dear Sirs,

I write as Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, to remind interested parties that although Rodin was much excited by the sculptures he saw in the Museum, and found them inspiring, he nevertheless lamented their exile from the sweet Attic sunlight beloved of Homer: "Toutes les lumières électriques n'ont pas la force de les empêcher de rechercher éternellement la douce lumière d'Homère".

Those sculptures, which we prefer to attribute to the Parthenon from whence they were grabbed rather than to Elgin the grabber, should now be relinquished back to the city they once crowned. They have inspired artists and thrilled the curious in their gloomy rooms in Bloomsbury for long enough and now the country of their origin deserves their glory, in the museum built especially to house them facing the Acropolis and the still miraculously upright building that they once adorned.

Yours sincerely,
Janet Suzman DBE
London NW3 2RN

The Right Honourable Robert Jenrick published his thoughts in the Daily Telegraph on Saturday 07 April. You can also read the entire article on MP Jenrick's website.

The article, 'Our Museums have fallen into the hands of a careless generation', caused concern amongst all generations represented in today's electorate of the UK. It would seem that Robert Jenrick did not appreciate the British Museum talking to another nation about artefacts from countries of origin in the museum's collection. 

"As was revealed last week the museum is in talks with four foreign governments to part with its collections.

The published minutes of the board tell us less about their plans than parish council minutes would of changes to verge cutting. We do know, however, that it is negotiating the long term loan of its most celebrated objects, the Elgin Marbles." Writes Robert Jenricks

“Long term loan” is a legal fiction constructed to circumvent the museum’s statutory duty to maintain its collection. There is surely no realistic prospect of the marbles returning from Greece should they ever be sent there. Parliament, like the nation, is being treated like a fool." He concludes going on to suggest that UK's curators are happy to denude museum, that the 'slippery slope' and 'floodgates' is 'corrosive post-colonial guilt wracking the progressive Left.'

Janet Suzman, BCRPM's Chair responded: 

Robert Jenrick's petulant essay on his website about the Parthenon Marbles - one might dub them the star steal - is typically high Tory; feigning ignorance of the full story of the steal. Their continuing presence in Bloomsbury is lumped with Jenrick's 'finders keepers' philosophy about all the other objects in the BM which were questionably obtained by a once powerful empire. His nationalism is depressing since these Marbles have a unique history, but with any luck a more generous solution might be achieved by more thoughtful actors.  

And many took to Twitter including BCRPM member Stuart O'Hara.

You can read all of Stuart's thread, here. 

Mark Stephens added his response too:

Professor Louis Godart, is the President of the Italian Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures and the IARPS' past President. He wrote in Archeo, a monthly Italian archaeology magazine, which began publishing in 1985.

The article 'Saint Sofia is the challenge to cvilisation' covers the history of this unique museum, which has been re-instated as a mosque. To read the article in full, which is in Italian, please follow the link:Santa Sofia e la sfida alla civiltà.

Professor Godart starts by writing that this "grandiose basilica, reconstructed by Emperor Justinian on the ruins of a Constantinian building, is the very symbol of the city of Istanbul. In 1934, the father of modern Turkey, Kemal Atatürk, decided to transform this contested monument into a museum, giving it a universal status. That status, seems to be destined to be cancelled, perhaps forever....."

He conscudes with the words of Bartholomew I of Constantinople, echoed by Lina Mendoni, the Greek Minister of Culture and Sport: "the decision to convert Agia Sofia into a mosque is a provocation in front of all civilised nations." From here the sentiments of all who try to halt todays nationalistic resurgence, which disgraces our world stage. I remember French President François Mitterrand during his last speech to the European Parliament, when he concluded that " Nationalism is war." 

Statement written by Dame Janet Suzman, Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles read out by Danny Chivers during Saturday's BP or not BP? protest at the British Museum.

These unmatched sculptures that you see before you have a home waiting for them. These figures, part of an ancient belief system, have been stranded in the grandest refugee centre you’ve ever seen - the great British Museum itself. But home is where they were created two and a half thousand years ago. 

In Athens stands a fine building especially built to house them, and next year this New Acropolis Museum will celebrate its tenth anniversary. On its top floor there are yearning gaps where these very sculptures should be sitting, joined with the other half of the pedimental carvings and in direct sight of the ancient building from which they were chopped, and which, astonishingly, still stands proud on its ancient rock. That fact alone makes these sculptures unique; we can still see exactly where they first displayed themselves, for they were never intended as separate 'works of art', but as part of the mighty whole of Athena’s glorious temple. Who, one wonders, was a mere occupying Sultan to sign away the genius of Periclean Athens? 

Now is the time to make a grand and generous gesture to the Greek people who in distant times laid the foundations of our modern democracies and who informed our artistic heritage. No sculptures have ever matched these languishing here. They are unarguably part of a history the Greeks feel profoundly. Modern Greeks may be as distant from their forebears as we to Anglo-Saxons but that never stopped a nation feeling viscerally connected to its antecedents. 

Let’s do so by celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Acropolis Museum in 2019 with the return of their prodigals. What a fabulous birthday present that would be! How civilised and decent of the British Museumto divest itself of dated strictures belonging to an era - now so over - of colonialist finders keepers. The time has come to do the right thing. Go BM! Do it! 

For more information on BP or not BP, visit here.

Jon Sleigh’s What Are Museums For? is one of a newish series from Bristol University Press in the vein of OUP’s Very Short Introductions or Bloomsbury’s 33&1/3. Other titles interrogate animal rights, the Olympics, philanthropy, and prisons; I’m looking forward to reading the volumes on music, journalism, and monarchy. Sleigh talks to people from the Ashmolean and British Museums alongside those from provincial collections (in the UK and Commonwealth) and niche museums dedicated to single topics and places. For those engaged with history and heritage, this book might turn out to be a bracing read. It was for me. In many cases the message is that museums are not “global [hubs] of scholarship, open to all”, to quote Neil MacGregor in Charlotte Higgins’ recent Guardian long read, but oppressive, uninviting spaces that force their visitors to submit to their intellectual authority and version of history. For example, I was content to view Classical antiquity in its Mediterranean context. I hadn’t really dealt with the possibility that its appropriation by 19^th Century imperialists prevents a great many people from having a positive emotional reaction to its artefacts.

That said, the overwhelming impression from Sleigh’s interviewees is that museums ought to be for everyone. These curators and museum staff may express it in different ways, but it’s clear that certain institutions, particularly those whose collections originate in Wunderkammern or the Grand Tour, have work to do to fulfil that ideal. There doesn’t seem to be dogma in museology beyond thoughtfulness and willingness to listen – this is a read gloriously removed from the rhetoric of culture wars – though it takes as much work again to prove to people that the work has been done, let alone get them into your museum in the first place. This gently provocative book often zooms out to imagine how museums and their collections may be viewed subjectively by the society that visits them, rather than as part of state apparatus to which people are subjected when they visit. The British Museum’s resemblance to a classical temple is more than superficial. Sleigh insists that “museums are not neutral. They were never intended to be.” The so-called universal museums are not important in this book and so little of it is relevant to the case of the Marbles. With Jon Sleigh and his interviewees, we’re among friends: as far as the author is concerned, they’re in the wrong place.

Sleigh also makes the point that, “at its inception… men were the expected primary audience within a patriarchal structure”, which makes one think not just of Archer’s painting of the temporary Elgin Room in 1819, which contains 16 men and four (accompanied) women, but also of Elgin’s initial display of the sculptures in the “shed on Park Lane”, alongside nude boxers – alas, no painting of this, so the gender split in the audience must remain a mystery.

This thought-provoking book repeatedly talks about museums catering for the past, present, and future in varying proportions – a means of inspiring how a newly-opened museum might behave. Speaking personally, there’s a lot of performative jargon which I had to work quite hard to understand, but its ethics are sound. What’s clear is that the niche museum is the future (that’s my interpretation, not Sleigh’s), and not just because it’ll be increasingly inappropriate to acquire and hoard collections from global sources. The universal museums are already isolated, and the breadth of their collections hasn’t resulted in the intended insights, comparisons, or levelling up (call it what you will) but rather encourages gatekeeping. Intersectionality is the way forward, but of visitors, not collections. Sleigh draws a direct line between BM founder Hans Sloane and 80s individualism:

The singular nature of where a museum can start from is vividly seen in Sloane himself – his wealth, his art[istic] taste, his social interactions, political decisions, and wishes are still to this day[sic] functioning today within UK democracy…

This is shortly followed by a quote from former BM director David M. Wilson:

Each generation makes its own contribution to the museum, and often it is the actions of individuals that change its course.

To me, that has shades there being “no such thing as society”.

There are a few more uncomfortable truths at play here – for example, digitising of collections increases accessibility for some constituencies while establishing barriers to others. Sleigh’s experts are big on the idea of placing their collections in a context that is relatable to the audience, particularly in collections where the audience may have lived experience of the exhibits: the example given is Matt Smith’s porcelain piece Happy Union, displayed in Liverpool’s Walker Art Gallery, which sits among the 19^th Century chintz but is charged with the legalisation of same-sex partnerships in 2013. The Marbles’ original context, that of 4^th Century Athenians, is unattainable, despite Alma-Tadema’s best efforts. But as we always rebuffed those who point out that they can’t be reattached to the Parthenon: their display in an airy gallery within sight of the temple, in Attic light, is a pretty good compromise, and a damn sight better than their gloomy cell in Bloomsbury.

There are ghostly traces of old arguments on both side of the Marbles debate in What Are Museums For? You don’t have to believe in the supernatural to enjoy Ghosts of the British Museum: A True Story of Colonial Loot and Restless Objects. It’s not clear if author Noah Angell does, though some of his interviewees certainly do. Ghosts exist insofar as the human belief in them does, in our culture and those of the ancient worlds whose artefacts populate our museums. The supernatural conceit is a clever means of exploring colonial legacies in archaeology, science, cultural trafficking, and tourism. This is best proved in Angell’s chapter on the caryatid in Room 19, which covers similar ground to AE Stallings’ superior 2023 Hudson Review article (a book-length version of which, Frieze Frame, is about to be published): contemporary Ottoman feelings about the sculptures and Elgin’s agents, the structural groaning of the remaining caryatids for their lost sister, and the debate of 1816 on the government’s prospective purchase of Elgin’s collection. The BM’s more durable arguments for retention of the sculptures are pricked and punctured, and as such this chapter would be a good digested read to bring the uninitiated up to speed if they don’t have time for Stallings’ much longer investigation.

Running through both these books is something obvious and peripheral to the Marbles debate; that the current model of the world’s biggest museums is out of kilter with the way the wind is blowing. However, if the biggest museums are to get with the programme, they must look to Erik Olin Wright: they must be dismantled rather than destroyed. And they certainly mustn’t hunker down and stick their fingers in their ears.

Angell goes into greater depth elsewhere in the book, but his Greek-centric chapter mentions the pending case of former BM curator Peter Higgs’ selling of items from the museum’s collection, the same that triggered the resignation of director Hartwig Fischer and deputy director Jonathan Williamsin 2023. Curious to think that the collection’s continued similarity to a Wunderkammer and not a 21^st Century museum facilitated a scandal that may yet prove a catalyst in the marbles’ return to Greece. It will be no surprise to any of us that this is the only chapter of Angell’s book not to feature an interview with a British Museum employee past or present. It also lacks a single ghost.

Yannis Andritsopoulos, UK correspondent for Ta Nea has researched UK's parliamentary archives and reported on his finding in today's Ta Nea. His article is aptly entitled: 'Research into the archives of the British Parliament: Two centuries of parliamentary battles over the Sculptures.'
"Mr. Churchill, would you consider the return of the Elgin Marbles to Greece?" 

Yannis begins with a question, which follows a comprehensive report that takes us back to 07 June 1816 and concludes in February 2022. 

What business do Konstantinos Karamanlis, Melina Mercouri, Kostas Simitis, Evangelos Venizelos and Kyriakos Mitsotakis have in the House of Commons and the House of Lords?
As themselves, none. Their names, however, have been mentioned more than once by members of Britain's Upper and Lower Houses.
The reason was none other than the Parthenon Sculptures, the request for the return to Greece, which is as old as their purchase by the parliament of Albion 207 years ago.
As the in-depth investigation of "Ta Nea" in the archives of the British Parliament reveals, the issue has, over the past two centuries, occupied dozens of British MPs, ministers and prime ministers.
The first time London was asked to repatriate Phidias' masterpieces was in the parliamentary debate about their acquisition. On 07 June 1816, Congressman Hugh Hammersley slammed their then-imminent purchase, speaking of a "dishonest transaction" and "looting."
He suggested that "the Marbles, so shamelessly acquired, should be bought, kept in the British Museum, and returned, without further formalities or negotiations, when requested by the present or any future government of the city of Athens."

To read the artricle in full, and in Greek, visit Ta Nea, or for an English translation, the document here.

Successive UK governments when faced with the question about the reunification of these sculptures seem determine not to look at this request as a case in its own right. Yet, no matter how often the response remains unchanged, the thirst to see the surviving sculptures reunited in the Acropolis Museum's top floor, glass-walled Parthenon Gallery is never going to go away.

Saying 'no' repeatedly to Greece is not changing the growing attitude of museum visitors. Is this about power? Probably. Is it about one nation wanting to hang onto its past at the cost of another's need to conserve a peerless collection of sculptures that was removed from a building created over 2, 500 years ago, which still crowns their capital city? Tragically, it would seem just so. Is it disrespect of one nation towards another nations cultural heritage? We hope not.

Let us not forget, that Greece is not asking for all that was removed from the Acropolis before it gained independence. And let us also remember that the British Museum is never going to be denuded of Greek artefacts, it currently has 108,184 of which 6,493 are on display. And once these specific sculptures are reunited with their other surviving half, Greece has offered the UK more artefacts, not seen outside of Greece.

Janet Suzman: "a major piece of research by Yannis! Since these Commons attitudes there has been a huge shift in the public mind-set about cultural appropriations, hence the present majority of people who think the Parthenon Marbles ought to be returned." 

Dame Janet Suzman talks to Georgia Economou of NEWS 24/7: "The Parthenon sculptures belong to the country that "gave birth" to them, not to a cold museum in England."

Dame Janet Suzman, Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles (BCRPM) and an internationally renowned actress talks to the Magazine about the Parthenon Sculptures and their long-suffering plight, plus the campaign to reunite them in the country that "gave birth" to them, their country of origin.

The Parthenon sculptures continue to make headlines in news outlets all over the world, not least in Greece. One could say that Lord Elgin's bribes and the men he paid to  detach these sculptures from the Sacred Rock of the Acropolis, and their subsequent exhibition at the British Museum constitutes to a great cultural wound. Their return, is a great dream that is constantly being dashed even today when the world shows that it is moving forward, and that museum policies are changing, but also that the basic issues of national cultural heritage have now been resolved.

On 16 December,  it was announced, with the "blessing" of Pope Francis, that three fragments, sculptural decorations from the Parthenon, housed in the Vatican museums would be repatriated, "as a testimony and a sign of the desire to continue the ecumenical course of truth."

About a month ago, once again we experienced hope for the sculptures return to Greece. Many expectations were raised in a large part to the announcement made by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis when he visited London, when he also met with King Charles (and not with the new British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak).

THE ELGIN MARBLES AT THE BRITISH MUSEUM (PHOTO: MARKOS CHOUZOURIS / EUROKINISSI)

We learned of secret meetings between the Prime Minister himself and the Director of the British Museum, George Osborne, while newspaper headlines claimed that we were closer than ever to a repatriation agreement. However, everyone's hopes were yet again dashed when Rishi Sunak's official spokesman made it clear that the British Museum is legally prohibited from dismantling its huge collection and that the British government is not considering amending or changing the museum's law.

It was certain that this would happen. That is why a few days ago we spoke with 4 leading researchers about how feasible a repatriation in the true meaning of the term was possible and not a "repatriation" using the model of the Stern collection.

After the publication of this article, we were contacted by the long established British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, as we had made a distinction  between the "British Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures" to which Matthew Taylor belongs. The latter on November 18, in an article published in "The Scotsman" wrote: "Solution for the "Elgins"? How the American multimillionaire Stern created a model for the reunification of the Parthenon sculptures in Athens". In this article he expressed the opinion that "previous negotiations are stuck for the time being on the issue of property. But what if the British Museum recognised ownership of the works in Greece, while retaining the rights to exhibit them for the time being? Surely this could be a big step forward?"

The BCRPM recently referred to a New York Times report and to the statements of Gary Vikan, former director of the Baltimore Museum, who said: "If someone tells me that by sending the "Elgin Marbles" back to Greece, somehow the British Museum will be emptied, it is nonsense."

Janet Suzman AP

We spoke to the Chair of the British Committee and great actress, Dame Janet Suzman, and asked her questions about the reunification of the Marbles. She claims that the reunification of the Marbles is far from clear: "The road remains long and very unclear. We all need to have patience as diplomacy slowly moves towards a solution we hope for," she tells the Magazine.

What made you want to support the case of the Parthenon Sculptures? What does this "struggle" mean to you?

I was born in South Africa and so early on I was "introduced" to the blatant injustice committed by the strongest elements against a weaker opponent. I am talking about apartheid, of course. We who have lived in a police state know these things very well. In the 18th century, Britain was an extremely powerful country, and it took what it could - because it could - from many parts of the world.

As for the "Parthenon Marbles" that Lord Elgin took from Greece as Ambassador to Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman Empite - the truth is that no written permission to do so ever came to light. Then, as now, people are open to bribery. And so it happened then. The injustice is clear. These sculptures were part of the Parthenon edifice itself. They were forcibly cut off from the monument and removed from the country, and now it is a matter of pure dignity to return them.

To be honest, I hadn't dealt with Greece at all until I left South Africa to study theatre in the UK. With a group of young graduates from the Department of Fine Arts of my University, we flew on a fine day in 1959 from Johannesburg to Europe. I will never forget the morning when, after a long overnight flight, our plane landed in Athens. Back then there was not the current airport, but a much smaller one. We descended the steps of the plane and walking on the asphalt to enter the arrivals building, the strong sunlight made us blink for a moment.

A beautiful blue sky was above our heads. This clarity "stayed" with us every hour and minute of the 5 days we were in Greece before leaving for London. It was magical. We watched "The Phoenicians", a performance at the Herodes Atticus Theatre starring the great Katina Paxinou and it was unforgettable - it was the best introduction to the ancient classical plays one could wish for. Many years later I played Clytemnestra and Helen of Troy in a renowned production called The Greeks, produced by the Royal Shakespeare Company in 1980 at The Aldwych Theatre in London. I was already fascinated by the Ancient World when Melina (Mercouri) stormed my life a few years later.

I quickly understood that these inimitable sculptures belong to the country in which they were created, and not to a cold museum in England.

What are the memories you have of Melina Mercouri?

Melina can only be likened to a force of nature. Her strong presence swirled around us on this trip to the UK in the 80s, when she began the movement for the "liberation" of the Parthenon Sculptures from the "grey" display room in the British Museum. She was asking for their return to Greece, where they belong. Vanessa Redgrave, also known for her commitment to various political causes, supported this issue as I did. I quickly understood that these inimitable sculptures belong to the country in which they were created, and not to a cold museum in England.

Janet Suzman, Melina Mercouri and Vanessa Redgrave at the Greek Ambassador's Residence in London in the 80's. Shutterstock 361013921

What is the purpose of the British Committee of Sculptures and how important is its contribution?

The Parthenon Sculptures are made of stone. They need an advocate to talk about them, particularly in English. Eleni Cubitt founded this committee to do just that. I knew Eleni and she knew I was in complete agreement with this just cause. Much later, when she was in a nursing home in Islington, in October 2016, I was asked to chair the British Committee for their Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles.

The cultural heritage of Greece has fully done its job in Britain: it has opened the gates of classical science to Europe. After so many years of struggle for the repatriation of these scuptures, they now belongs to where they came from and to the wonderful Acropolis Museum that was built to exhibit them as close as it is physically possible to the Parthenon, which still stands.

We are one of the many committees worldwide that want to see the Marbles reunited with their other halves. Being here in Britain, in the place where half of the surviving  Marbles are currently displayed, we can talk directly with the people holding the keys who will one day "unlock" their forced stay in the British Museum. And most importantly we can continue to feed this "flame" with information on our site, write letters and articles in British newspapers and try to make as much noise as possible, while following the policies of the Greek government itself.

What should be Greece's main argument in order to return the Sculptures to their place?

The cultural heritage of Greece has fully done its work in Britain: that is, it has opened the gates of classical scholarship to Europe. After so many years of struggle for their repatriation, she now belongs to where she came from and to the wonderful Acropolis Museum that was built for this purpose.

BCRPM image

Has the Greek government approached you?

Our Committee is in regular contact with the Greek Embassy in London, with the management of the New Acropolis Museum and of course with the Ministry of Culture in Athens.

Was the committee aware of the secret talks between Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and the British Museum?

They wouldn't be secret if we knew about them.

Recently, solutions have been proposed, such as the exchange of antiquities or the recognition of ownership with an exhibition of the sculptures in London. Do you think it might be one of the avenues to negotiate with the British Museum?

These potential exchanges are long-standing as proposals for the emergence of a 'give and take' agreement. The concept of ownership is separate as a matter and of course the most sensitive, yet to be negotiated.

 BCRPM image

Pope Francis has decided that the Vatican Museums will return three fragments of the Parthenon to Greece, amid a global account in which Western institutions have begun to return objects to their countries of origin. At the same time, we read in many articles that the Marbles belong to the "world" and therefore should be left where "everyone" can enjoy them. What do you think?

The British Museum has a unique collection of global artefacts. It has over 100,000 Greek artefacts. It is the ideal place to study "visually" the cultures of the whole world. However, fashion and opinions are changing...

The return of the Benin Bronzes recently from the Horniman Museum and the University of Cambridge, the fragments of the Parthenon returning to Greece from the Vatican, but also the rethinking of repatriations from other major institutions in the UK and Europe, mark a change of attitude and respect for other cultures. This is something that is to be warmly welcomed.

People are moving forward in Italy and I hope that the British Museum will follow this path.

I would also add that with Mrs. Cubitt, the Honorary Secretary of the BCRPM, we were in contact with the Vatican Museum even before the Acropolis Museum opened. They, too, were surprised that in the UK there was a Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles! At that time their own laws prevented an unconditional return, and therefore they loaned to the Acropolis Museum a fragment of about 20 centimeters. It comes from the northern frieze of the Parthenon and depicts the head of a young man carrying offerings in the Panathenaic procession. In 2008 our committee had contacted the then director of the Vatican Museums, Francesco Buranelli, who at the time spoke of the generosity of the spirit in the reunification of the fragmented marbles.

In 2016 Pope Francis appointed the first female Director of the Vatican Museum (Barbara Jatta, an Italian art historian) and now, in 2022, he has made this great donation to His Beatitude Jerome II, not only with one fragment, but with three. In other words, he did the right thing. People are moving forward in Italy and I hope that the British Museum will follow this path also.

How optimistic are you about the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles?

I am and have always been optimistic. The pressure is rising, the tide is turning, exciting exchanges I am sure will take place and modern technologies will certainly play an important role. All museums have to deal with the changes brought about by history (e.g. the Rijksmuseum in the Netherlands and the Louvre) and some need, as we see, more time to find a way to respond while maintaining their glamour at the same time. And laws may need to be revised.

To read the original ariticle in Greek online, follow the link here.

Geraldine Kendall Adams article in the Museums Journal has the headline: British Museum announces new £50m BP deal to fund masterplan.

The institution announced the BP deal as it outlined the next steps of its 10-year masterplan, which will include a new government-funded Energy Centre, the redevelopment of a third of its galleries, and the official opening of its new Archaeological Research Collection (BM_ARC) at the Thames Valley Research Park in June 2024.

The masterplan will see the launch of an international architectural competition to reimagine the museum’s galleries next spring. The competition will focus on the museum's "Western Range" – which currently houses collections such as Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome – and will involve the introduction of contemporary architecture and gallery displays, along with the restoration of the listed building.

The new archaeological research facility – the first phase of the masterplan – will house items ranging from nails from the Sutton Hoo ship burial to Peruvian fabrics and 5000-year-old antler picks. It will seek to offer a “radically different” approach to museum storage by facilitating research and study by both academics and members of the public.

The museum masterplan will include public study rooms © John McAslan + Partners

To read the full article, follow the link here.

Also in The Times, David Sanderson writes:

The museum’s board has surprised the country’s cultural community by signing a ten-year deal with BP, which has in recent years been shunned by almost all of Britain’s artistic organisations.

It has emerged that trustees took the decision in June last year at a meeting in which they agreed to “operate as a united board” despite personal disagreements. George Osborne, the chairman, withdrew after declaring a conflict of interest.

The minutes of the meeting record that “it was unanimously agreed that accepting the sponsorship was on balance in the best interests of the museum and the protection, display and use of its collection”.

Muriel Gray resigned her post at the meeting in November immediately before the trustees discussed how to make public the BP deal.

Gray, who had been a trustee for seven years, did not respond to requests for comment. The minutes record her as saying she made a personal decision to submit her resignation to the government.

Chris Garrard, codirector of the pressure group Culture Unstained, said that it was an “astonishingly out of touch and completely indefensible decision”.

He said: “It comes just days after delegates at Cop28 agreed that the world must transition away from fossil fuels. We believe this decision is illegitimate and in breach of the museum’s own climate commitments and sectorwide codes and will be seeking legal advice in order to mount a formal challenge to it.”

Ta Nea, 12 March 2019 

Greece’s daily newspaper, Ta Nea, has seen, studied and photographed the controversial ‘firman’, the Ottoman document used by Lord Elgin to remove the Parthenon Sculptures and bring them to London. It is the Italian version of the ‘firman’ which was acquired by the British Museum 13 years ago and has since been kept in its Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities.

Ioannis Andritsopoulos,Ta Nea's UK Correspondant

The original ‘firman’ allegedly written in the Ottoman language has been lost, with several experts questioning both if it ever existed and the authenticity of the document currently held in London. The so-called firman played a key role in the House of Commons’ decision to buy the Sculptures from Elgin in 1816.

To read Yannis Andritsopulos' article in Ta Nea, follow the link here.

Several historians and lawyers cast doubt on whether Elgin legitimately removed the Marbles from the Acropolis site.

“Concerning the precise wording of the two 'firmans' (legally binding official royal permits) that the Ottoman Sultanate is said to have granted to His Britannic Majesty's Ambassador to the Sublime Porte (Thomas Bruce, the 7th Lord Elgin), all or almost all is smoke and mirrors. For no literal transcripts of the original Turkish documents exist - or are known to exist - today. One thing, however, all sane commentators agree on: no firman can possibly have granted Elgin explicit permission to do what he and his agents in fact did, namely destroy rather than remove to safekeeping significant portions of the original Parthenon marbles.”, said Paul Cartledge, A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture emeritus, University of Cambridge, and Vice Chairman of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles.

Professor Paul Cartlege

“The so-called 'firman' was an official communication from the Grand Vizier or in his absence his deputy to the Governor and Judge of Athens. It was not, as has been claimed by staff of the British Museum 'permission given to Lord Elgin'. Plentiful contemporary historical sources confirm that the local Ottoman officials exceed the terms of the document, as the Ottoman Government itself acknowledged. It was their understanding that the pieces had been removed 'without remonstrance' that persuaded a Parliamentary Select Committee in 1816 to recommend the purchase of the Elgin collection. They had, of course, no authority to pronounce on Ottoman law, nor did their decision to waive doubts about legality, on which they did not make a recommendation, amount to asserting legal ownership. What some may take from Dr Fischer's remark is that he is claiming that an act of the British Parliament could somehow give legitimacy to a messy business of what in modern terms would be described as bribes, threats, and political pressures” commented renowned William St. Clair, senior research fellow at the Institute of English Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London.

William St Clair

On the 20th of June, eight supporters for the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles including for the firrst time, the Chair of the British Committee Janet Suzmann, stood outside the British Museum, handing out leflets and repeating slogans: BM Come Clean, Reunite the Parthenon Marbles, Tell The Story,Time is Now, Renite the Marbles in the Acropolis Museum in Athens. In the queue to get into the BM there were those that were looking forward to seeing the sculptures from the Parthenon too. They emerged disappointed. The Parthenon Galleries were closed.

The telephone call to the museum on the Monday, the 21st of June to ask how long the closure would last was met with: "not long, as the sculptures are a popular treasure of the museum." When asked when to call back, the reply was 'in a week's time'. That week became 8 weeks and then the article in the Art Newspaper: 'Is it raining again in the British Museum’s Parthenon gallery? A leaking roof has delayed the reopening of seven galleries of Greek art', written by Cristina Ruiz and published this Wednesday, 11 August 2021.The article was updated today, Friday 13th August to include a statement by Greece's Minister of Culture & Sport, Dr Lina Mendoni.

The statement from Minisiter Mendoni can be read in the Art Newspaper article, as well as on the official Greek Ministry's portaland below:

"This is not the first time that photographs have been published revealing that the conditions for exhibiting the Parthenon Sculptures at the British Museum are not only inappropriate, but also dangerous. In September 2019, when similar photos were published, we had stressed that these images fully strengthen the legal, ongoing and non-negotiable request from Greece for the reunification of the sculptures. The Parthenon Marbles, one of the greatest monuments of Western civilisation, must return to their homeland."

The leak that occured on 21 December of 2018 was questioned by Ta Nea's UK Correspondent Yannis Andritsopoulos and published in an article in January 2019, where he asked the Director of the British Museum, Hartwig Fisher, this question: 'There were several media reports last month regarding a leak in the Duveen Gallery where the Marbles are housed. As you can imagine there was a negative reaction. What’s your explanation about what happened?'

Dr Fisher's reply was: "We had a tiny leak in one area of the roof in the Parthenon Sculptures’ galleries. A small quantity of rain entered the gallery, but did not touch any of the Sculptures and this was fixed right away."

As the leak was fixed right away and was only 'tiny', 2 years and 5 months later, another leak? And why is this one taking months to repair ? With no date for when Room 18, the Parthenon Galleries at the British Museum, might be re-opening.

Many question the climate controls of the gallery even when there are no leaks. In the winter large blow heaters are positioned in the room to provide heating and in the hotter summer months, the Fire Exit doors are kept open for ventilation.

Whatever the long term prospects for the sculptures still in London (unnecessarily divided from the their surviving halves in Athens' Acropolis Museum), the lack of dialogue between two friendly nations, Greece and the United Kingdom, on this cultural matter, continues to be long overdue. All the efforts made by Greece since their independence over 200 years ago and at other key times, including in the 80's when the then Minister of Culture, Melina Mercouri visited the British Museum and vowed to keep campaining for ever or until the Parthenon Marbles were returned.

BCRPM began campaigning in 1983 and Emanuel Comino's Australian Committee started even earlier. The calls have not diminished and are echoed by the International Association supporting the Greek governments efforts. There is no time like the present to start a dialogue that would result in a long awaited reunification of a peerless collection of sculptures, which still belong to the Parthenon (as their name suggests).

The Parthenon still stands, with the Acropolis Museum in Athens offering an exceptional opporunity for all to see the sruviving pieces displayed the right way round, with direct views to the Parthenon. This context is one, which the ancients that created such an iconic building, would be proud to 'see' humanity respect.

Janet Suzman's commented on the current closure of Room 18: "Aware as we were of this, what is going on? Is the British Museum trying to Anglicise the Parthenon Marbles by covering them in damp? BCRPM is a little bit concerned. They would be much happier in that Attica light."

Additional statement made by Dr Mendoni, Greek Minister of Culture and Sport, 15 August 2021, in response to the conditions and ongoing closure of the Greek galleries in the British Museum:

"For decades, the main argument of the British, for the Parthenon Sculptures to remain in London, was that in the British Museum these masterpieces are exhibited in more suitable conditions than those that Greece could offer.

For 12 years, the Acropolis Museum in Athens, one of the best museums in the world, exhibits the Parthenon Sculptures in the most appropriate way, with direct views to the Parthenon itself. The sculptures in Athens await their final reunion with those illegally looted by Elgin. The British argument has long since been refuted.

Today, the conditions for exhibiting the Parthenon Sculptures at the British Museum are offensive and dangerous. The Sculptures cannot be expected to wait in Room 18 for the completion of the "masterplan" of the British Museum, which does not match those of the Parthenon Gallery, here in Athens.

Greece's constant and fair request for the return of the Sculptures to Athens is non-negotiable and today is absolutely relevant."

What do the Parthenon and a weird Brazilian dinosaur known as “Ubirajara jubatus”* have in common? Apparently, not much. Yet, they are both protagonists of international restitution claims. On one side, Greece’s claim for the return of the Parthenon sculptures held in the British Museum, which will soon become a bicentenary dispute. On the other, Brazil’s claim for the restitution of a fossil holotype previously held in the State Museum of Natural History in Karlsruhe and demanded since early 2021. While Brazilians got to see their fossil return home this month, Greece’s claim remains the longest-standing dispute in the field.

Despite the obviously distinct nature of both claims, they complete each other so as to form a perfect example of how relentlessly repetitive and fallacious the “arguments” presented by retentionists are. In my Master's Thesis (Munich, 2020) I analyzed Greece’s claim against the British Museum and the United Kingdom under the International Human Rights Law framework. For that, I had to deconstruct a recurrent argument for dismissing Greece’s stance: that Lord Elgin had the authorization to remove and export the sculptures.

The argument goes: Elgin obtained a written authorization (the famous “firman”) to remove and export the Parthenon Sculptures, issued in 1801 by the competent Ottoman authority, as Greece was under Ottoman rule. This claim is deeply flawed for a myriad of reasons I explored in the Thesis, but let us assume, for argument’s sake, that the surviving versions of the “firman” do reflect the content of a real document issued prior to the Parthenon’s dismemberment and the dispatch of the sculptures.

Under Ottoman Law in the early 1800s, the Sultan had absolute control over antiquities and only he could authorize such removal. Nonetheless, the document so often relied upon by the UK and the British Museum is signed by Caimacan Seged Abdullah, an acting Grand Vizier who, regardless of his high status in the Ottoman Government, had no authority to issue a firman – definitely not one concerning the export of antiquities.

Likewise, when arguing that the “Ubirajara” fossil was legally exported from Brazil, the authors that described the species claimed they had a written export authorization from an agent of the National Department for Mineral Production. The claim completely ignores that Brazilian Law forbids any export of holotypes (as the “Ubirajara”) and that, even if it were a regular fossil, the competent authority to issue such an authorization would be the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq).

Back to the other side of the Atlantic, let us look at what this “firman” actually states. The supposed text of the 1801 Document (as the original has never been found) begins with a description of the activities Elgin wanted his workers to conduct – with no indication that he sought permission to remove any sculptures. The second part of the document expresses that it is the desire of the Ottoman Court to favor Elgin’s requests. The widespread argument that the “firman” authorized the removal of the Parthenon Sculptures relies on an extract from the last paragraph: “[no one should] hinder them from taking away any pieces of stone with inscriptions or figures”. The decontextualized interpretation of this quote ignores that, just above, the document presents an express condition to the authorization: “particularly as there is no harm in the said figures and edifices being thus viewed, contemplated, and designed”.

The sculptures were affixed to the Parthenon and were an integral part of the building. There is simply no good faith interpretation that could lead to the conclusion that the document allowed for the Parthenon’s dismantling. This quote, when properly contextualized, clearly refers to objects dug from the rubble of the Parthenon’s surroundings, which is compatible with what Elgin requested. Thus, even if we were to deem this document reliable, there is no way it authorized the export of the sculptures. What probably happened is that they left Greece in packages with misleading content descriptions (and under heavy bribes, but that's a story for another day...).

Now, it is time to zoom in on the authorization that supposedly allowed for the “Ubirajara” fossil to be exported from Brazil. As explained by Aline Ghilardi, a leading Brazilian paleontologist in the #UbirajaraBelongstoBR campaign, the “authorization” presented by the authors does not mention anything about definitively exporting the materials and does not specify the boxes’ content. In her words, “as it was written, the authors could continue to describe new species for the next 20 years alleging that all holotypes were inside of it”. In any event, the narrative by the authors was considered untrue by German authorities (but that’s another story for another day...).

Almost 200 years separate Greece's first claim over the Parthenon Sculptures and the #UbirajaraBelongstoBR campaign. Apparently, not enough to come up with better excuses for illegal and unethical behavior. Their arguments are old, weak, and honestly – and I say this as a Brazilian – offensive. We will continue to counter them all.

I end this brief commentary by drawing a last parallel between Greece and Brazil, Sculpture and Dinosaur. Two obvious statements that somehow still must be echoed:

#UbirajaraBelongstoBR

#ParthenonBelongstoGreece.

* In case you are wondering about the quotation marks, the article describing the species has since been retracted, which means that this name currently holds no taxonomic value.

Letícia Machado Haertel, Master of Laws (LMU), Specialist in Int. Cultural Heritage Law

BCRPM would like to thank Letícia  for this excellent article.

Editorial Footnote: on the pseudo-legality of Elgin’s in fact theft, see now, definitively, Catharine Titi The Parthenon Sculptures and International Law(Springer, 2023).

‘Scaped from the ravage of the Turk and Goth,

Thy country sends a spoiler worse than both’

In 1809, the young Lord Byron, one of the prominent figures of the Romantic Movement and the most liberal voice of the time, during his first trip to Greece, visited the Parthenon. The mutilation of the monument by Lord Elgin was still fresh and the magnitude of the crime shocked the young philhellene. In the poem-complaint "The Curse of Minerva", which he wrote in Athens on March 17, 1811, he asks the goddess Athena (Minerva) to punish the perpetrator, who took advantage of his position against an enslaved people.

The vandalized Temple of the Athena Parthenos was rendered by foreign traveler painters, such as the Irish painter and antiquarian E. Dodwell, sparking an international outcry, along with the "Curse of Minerva" and the " Childe Harold's Pilgrimage " written by Lord Byron a year later.

On March 10, 1812, John Murrey, publisher and friend of Byron, published Childe Harold's Pilgrimage. In this long poem, the hero wanders in countries and places, records his impressions, making bitter thoughts about the looting of monuments by Elgin. Five hundred copies, priced at 30 shillings each, sold out in three days. Over the next two days, another 3,000 copies of a 12-pound version was released, causing Byron to exclaim, "I awoke one morning and found myself famous!"

The enormous success of Childe Harold's Songs, and its translations into European languages, meant that Byron's thoughts and references to Greece were read by more readers than all travel books combined.

From 1812 onwards, Greece entered the consciousness of Western Europeans and Americans as a place inhabited by modern people, whose political future began to be recognized as a problem that should be addressed, contributing to the strengthening of philhellenism.

Ironically, the depredations to the Acropolis of Athens by Elgin and the acquisition, in 1817, of the "Elgin Marbles" by the British Museum were a decisive factor in Britain in the ascendancy of classical Greece. (St Clair 1998; King 2006). In Germany, the process had begun earlier, around 1750, through the writings of the scholar art historian Johann Winckelmann, father of classical archeology and founder of the movement of neoclassicism.

The condemnation of Elgin's activities in his country by prominent personalities contributed to the Parthenon Sculptures being evidence of the living conscience of the Greeks, who, as descendants of the Ancients, acted as custodians of their ancestral heritage.

The presence of the Sculptures in London and the discussion they provoked significantly influenced the aesthetic perception in British society and beyond. At a time when classicism - still a dominant trend - was heavily attacked by proponents of Romanticism, the Sculptures helped to reshape artistic taste as they represented a model different from abstract Roman art, being the leading example of the new naturalistic Grecian Gusto (Y. Hamilakis, 1999).

The admiration of European travelers for classical Greece often led to attempts to appropriate it, with the formation of private collections and the sale of antiquities culminating in the 19th century. As early as the end of the 18th century, the territories of the Ottoman Empire and the Italian peninsula were part of the Grand Tour, a monthslong journey of spiritual and aesthetic culture made by European nobles after completing their studies.

The French philhellene writer, politician and traveler, viscount François-René de Chateaubriand, who had already visited Greece in 1806, took a leading role in the Philhellenic Committee of Paris, publishing in 1825 his “An appeal for the sacred cause of the Greeks” (  Appel en faveur de la cause sacrée des Grecs) and the "Note on Greece”.  Although in his Itinerary from Paris to Jerusalem, just three years after the looting of the monument, he comments caustically on the theft of the Sculptures by Elgin, he mentions:

Descending from the Acropolis, I took with me a piece of marble from the Parthenon, as I had collected a piece of stone from the tomb of Agamemnon. And since then, I remove something from the monuments I visit, as a souvenir. Of course, they are not as nice as the ones snatched by Mr. de Choiseul and Lord Elgin, but they are enough for me.

Meanwhile, radical changes are taking place in Greece. The emerging new social class with European education and links with the western elites, discovered the heritage of their ancestors, cultivating self-awareness and participating in the creation of the community of the Greek Nation, a process that took on the dimensions of national rebirth. The looting of antiquities contributed to the awareness of the historical past. The establishment of the Greek state led to the systematic care, collection and study of antiquities, since they represented the visible material  proof of the national continuity and were deeply integrated in the newly constructed national memory (Y. Hamilakis, 1999).

The Nobel Prize awarded poet George Seferis records it masterfully. The weight of the marbles hurts, but it is impossible to let it down:

I woke up with this marble head in my hands

that exhausts my elbows and I do not know where to put it down.

In his essay "A Greek - Makriyannis" (1981), G. Seferis highlights the famous saying of General Makriyannis in his Memoirs, which we often mention in public speech:

"I had two wonderful statues, a woman and a prince, intact - the veins were visible, they were so perfect. When they destroyed Poros, some soldiers had taken them, and in Argos they would sell it to some Europeans; they were looking for a thousand thalers... I gathered the soldiers, I told them: ‘Even if they give you ten thousand thalers, never accept for them to leave our homeland. That's what we fought for ".

"You understand, says Seferis. It’s not Lord Byron speaking, neither the most learned, nor the archaeologist; a son of a shepherd of Roumeli speaks with a body full of wounds. ‘That's what we fought for’. Fifteen gilded academies are not worth the value of this man’s words. Because only in such feelings can the education of the Nation take root and flourish. In real feelings and not in abstract notions about the beauty of our ancient ancestors or in dried hearts that have become obfuscated by the fear of the mass mob".

Panagiotis Kanellopoulos in the History of the European Spirit, points out that the Sicilian historian Xavier Scrofani, who visited Greece in 1794-95, fifteen years before Lord Byron, observed, like the latter, the continuity of the language with that of the ancients.

Reşid Pasha, also known as Kütahı, in 1826, besieged the Acropolis, where Greek fighters were holding cover. From his reference to the Sublime Porte, it is clear that he had realized the connection of Greek antiquities with the birth of national consciousness in the enslaved Greeks and their great contribution to the creation of the philhellenic movement in Europe, which will play such a decisive role in the course and final outcome of the Struggle for Independence (Th. Veremis, 2020).

The Bonapartist colonel, Olivier Voutier, narrates that in 1822, many fighters besieging the Acropolis of Athens chose to retreat, in order to stop the besieged Turks from demolishing the surviving parts of the walls and breaking the columns of the Parthenon to grab the lead of ancient binders, which was useful for casting bullets. With the mediation of Kyriakos Pittakis, later curator of Antiquities of the newly formed Greek state, Odysseas Androutsos stopped the destruction of the monument by supplying the Turks with bullets.

The first poetic response to the outbreak of the Greek Revolution did not come from Byron but from his younger contemporary and friend and one of the most important English romantic poets, Percy Bysshe Shelley. Shelley's enthusiasm for the flame of independence that prevailed in Greece prompted him to write in 1822, the lyrical drama Hellas, which he dedicated to Prince Mavrokordato. In the preface he states: "We are all Greeks. Our laws, our literature, our religion, our arts have their roots in Greece".

John Keats, one of the most beloved romantic poets, with a permanent presence in the British textbooks, a close friend of Byron and Shelley, inspired by the myths of classical antiquity in his widely read poem Ode on a Grecian Urn, written in 1819, reaffirms his belief in ancient Greek art as an autonomous body of humanitarian values, through an exemplary expression for the aesthetics of the 19th century.

The British Hellenist Jennifer Wallace points out that two events at the beginning of 19th century heralded the institutionalisation of Hellenism in the British establishment and the supremacy of Greece over Rome as a cultural and aesthetic model. First, when between 1801 and 1806 Lord Elgin removed all the sculptures from the Parthenon and shipped them to England to improve British taste, and second, in 1807, when Oxford introduced classical degree examinations. Greece and its culture were now considered essential elements for the moral education of  the young and the touchstone for artists.

The reduction of classical antiquity as the cosmological cornerstone of Western European civilization had fundamental consequences in the recovery of national identity. The Sculptures of the Parthenon, being one of the most powerful landmarks of Hellenism, were to contribute decisively to the struggle of “paliggenesia” (regeneration).

Sophia Hiniadou Cambanis, is a lawyer specialized in public law and cultural management, Hellenic Parliament

* The text was based on the speech presented at the Conference "Political Patriotism and the Constitutions of the Greek Revolution", Theocharakis Foundation, 13-14.10.2021 and the article was also published in Ta Nea 15 November 2021.